Slashdot Mirror

From what I've saw of them this may be true of some people flying the GamerGate flag but there are people who are vociferously ethics only who don't like all of the identity politics crosstalk.

This is perhaps informative (unless one believes that the majority of the respondents are being disingenuous) http://gamepolitics.com/2015/0...

"I asked my first question, “What is GamerGate?” because that will be asked at the upcoming SPJ AirPlay discussion on August 15 and I wanted to compare answers."

"Their top-voted response explained, “GamerGate is a movement dedicated to fighting for ethics in (gaming) journalism and against censorship and the politicization of (gaming) media and games. It arose after several corruption scandals in the gaming media, attacks on the gamer identity and attempts by the gaming media and ‘cultural critics’ to force a political ideology down the throats of gamers.”"

I guess that there is a chance that a much larger group of people (including international Gamergaters?) that agree with your analysis missed Brad Glasgow's questions but assuming this isn't the case the group consensus seems to be focused on ethics.

Ultimately I accept that people are drawn to the group for different reasons but I think it's reasonable, if one is going to generalise, to look at the majority opinion and use it as a basis of describing the group.

Nice try. "Thanks to gamergate", three women have been forced from their homes from threats that law enforcement officers found credible enough to suggest that. Trying to pretend that gamergate has done anything but abuse people defines you as - at best - an imbecile.

It causes you physical pain that few here buy into the "mysogyny and harrassment" narrative, doesn't it?

The cover-up didn't work.
The week-long gaming press news blackout and ongoing user comment/forum censorship (in former free-speech strongholds such as 4chan and Reddit, no less) didn't work.
The coordinated, ongoing smear campaign that began with the "Gamers are Over" articles hasn't worked.
The endless train of embarrassingly desperate counter-hashtags hasn't worked.
The Wikipedia and Nightline hit pieces only damage those outlets' credibility for short-term effect.
The SVU episode . . . hahaahhahaha WOW, where do I even begin . . . it is progapanda that couldn't be more precisely crafted to the corrupt press's specifications (i.e. "narrative"), and broadcast to a national non-gamer audience, much of which likely accepted it as reality. It was a wake-up call to quite a few previously unaware or neutral parties, especially game devs*.

Eurogamer is the latest games journalism site to update its ethics policy in the wake of Gamergate, joining PC Gamer, IGN, the Escapist, and of course Kotaku/Gawker (though in Gawker's case, they put up more of a fight and the Gamergate pressure to be ethical had to be routed through the FTC).

Gamergate also got Brad Wardell (CEO of Stardock) some long-overdue apologies for hit pieces run against him:
https://twitter.com/iamDavidWi...
http://www.gamepolitics.com/20...
http://www.zenofdesign.com/in-...

Ask yourself how much of this you've seen reported in the corrupt media (which at this point, sadly, clearly includes Slashdot). Of course none of it ever had a chance of appearing in the Wikipedia article. Nothing enrages anti-Gamergaters more than someone covering both sides of the story, and that should tell you something.

Their side thrives only in an environment of propaganda and censorship, and evaporates when faced with integrity and transparency. They prove the need for Gamergate every time they write an article based on the assumption that terrorism and child porn^W^W^W^W misogyny and harassment have become the root passwords to the Constitution^W^W journalistic ethics.


* like Mark Kern and Ken Levine, who had nothing to do with Gamergate, but were so disgusted by the SVU episode that they publically called on the gaming press to stop slandering gamers. Both were instantly swarmed by anti-GG on twitter, and VG24/7 ran a hit piece on Kern without even getting his side of the story, and refused even after he specifically asked them. I think Eurogamer saw exactly what happened to Kern, and it's no accident that tha

The cover-up didn't work.
The week-long gaming press news blackout and ongoing user comment/forum censorship (in former free-speech strongholds such as 4chan and Reddit, no less) didn't work.
The coordinated, ongoing smear campaign that began with the "Gamers are Over" articles hasn't worked.
The doxxing and harassment of pro-GG folks hasn't worked.
The endless train of embarrassingly desperate counter-hashtags hasn't worked.
The Wikipedia and Nightline hit pieces only damage those outlets' credibility for short-term effect.
The SVU episode . . . hahaahhahaha WOW, where do I even begin . . . it is progapanda that couldn't be more precisely crafted to the corrupt press's specifications (i.e. "narrative"), and broadcast to a national non-gamer audience, much of which likely accepted it as reality. It was a wake-up call to quite a few previously unaware or neutral parties, especially game devs*.

Eurogamer is the latest games journalism site to update its ethics policy in the wake of Gamergate, joining PC Gamer, IGN, the Escapist, and of course Kotaku/Gawker (though in Gawker's case, they put up more of a fight and the Gamergate pressure to be ethical had to be routed through the FTC). And there are probably more I'm forgetting.

Gamergate also got Brad Wardell (CEO of Stardock) some long-overdue apologies for hit pieces run against him:
https://twitter.com/iamDavidWi...
http://www.gamepolitics.com/20...
http://www.zenofdesign.com/in-...

Ask yourself how much of this you've seen reported in the corrupt media (which at this point, sadly, clearly includes Slashdot). Of course none of it ever had a chance of appearing in the Wikipedia article. Nothing enrages anti-Gamergaters more than someone covering both sides of the story, and that should tell you something.

Their side thrives only in an environment of propaganda and censorship, and evaporates when faced with integrity and transparency. They prove the need for Gamergate every time they write an article based on the assumption that terrorism and child porn^W^W^W^W misogyny and harassment have become the root passwords to the Constitution^W^W journalistic ethics.


* like Mark Kern and Ken Levine, who had nothing to do with Gamergate, but were so disgusted by the SVU episode that they publically called on the gaming press to stop slandering gamers. Both were instantly swarmed by anti-GG on twitter, and VG24/7 ran a hit piece on Kern without even getting his side of the story, and refused even after he specifically asked them. I think Eurogamer saw exactly what happened to Kern, and it's no accident that that their policy explicitly includes a "right of reply" (perhaps a subtle message that they won't similarly treat game devs like shit).

The cover-up didn't work.
The week-long gaming press news blackout and user comment/forum censorship didn't work.
The coordinated, ongoing smear campaign that began with the "Gamers are Over" articles hasn't worked.
The doxxing and harassment of pro-GG folks hasn't worked.
The endless train of embarrassingly desperate counter-hashtags hasn't worked.
The Wikipedia and Nightline hit pieces only damage those outlets' credibility for short-term effect.

PC Gamer is the latest games journalism site to update its ethics policy in the wake of Gamergate, joining IGN, the Escapist, and of course Kotaku/Gawker (though in Gawker's case, they put up more of a fight and the Gamergate pressure to be ethical had to be routed through the FTC). And there are probably more I'm forgetting.

Gamergate also got Brad Wardell (CEO of Stardock) some long-overdue apologies for hit pieces run against him:
https://twitter.com/iamDavidWi...
http://www.gamepolitics.com/20...
http://www.zenofdesign.com/in-...

Ask yourself how much of this you've seen reported in the corrupt media (which at this point, sadly, clearly includes Slashdot). Of course none of it ever had a chance of appearing in the Wikipedia article. Nothing enrages anti-Gamergaters more than someone covering both sides of the story, and that should tell you something.

Their side thrives only in an environment of propaganda and censorship, and evaporates when faced with integrity and transparency. They prove the need for Gamergate every time they write an article based on the assumption that terrorism and child porn^W^W^W^W misogyny and harassment have become the root passwords to the Constitution^W^W journalistic ethics.

The cover-up didn't work.
The week-long gaming press news blackout and user comment/forum censorship didn't work.
The coordinated, ongoing smear campaign that began with the "Gamers are over" articles hasn't worked.
The doxxing and harassment of pro-GG folks hasn't worked.
The endless train of embarrassingly desperate counter-hashtags hasn't worked.
The Wikipedia and Nightline hit pieces only destroy those outlets' credibility for short-term effect.

Last week PC Gamer became the latest games journalism site to update its ethics policy in the wake of Gamergate, joining IGN, the Escapist, and of course Kotaku/Gawker (though in Gawker's case, they put up more of a fight and the Gamergate pressure to be ethical had to be routed through the FTC). And there are probably more I'm forgetting.

Gamergate also got Brad Wardell (CEO of Stardock) some long-overdue apologies for hit pieces run against him:
https://twitter.com/iamDavidWi... [twitter.com]
http://www.gamepolitics.com/20... [gamepolitics.com]
http://www.zenofdesign.com/in-... [zenofdesign.com]

Ask yourself how much of this you've seen reported in the corrupt media (which at this point, sadly, clearly includes Slashdot). The anti-GG side thrives only in an environment of propaganda and censorship, and evaporates when faced with integrity and transparency. They prove the need for Gamergate every time they write an article based on the assumption that terrorism and child porn^W^W^W^W misogyny and harassment have become the root passwords to the Constitution^W^W journalistic ethics.

The single biggest outcome of Gamergate is that it has forced the Progressive Mafia to reveal their power levels up and down the web. On Slashdot, on Wikipedia, on forums, individual "personalities", hell all over the Main Stream Media. These guys are as transparent as conservative christian associations now (and about as puritan and censoring). They exposed every asset they had in a massive push to stop gamers talking about the damage their politics was doing to video games.

And the funniest part: Gamers didn't even care to begin with. Most are actually left leaning. The censorship, suppression and media spin was what drove everything. Journalists and neo-feminists threw fuel on the fire every time they painted (left wing) gamers as troglodytes and misogynists. The entire incident is Driving a rift in the left, just like neo-cons drive a rift in the right.

Gamers were a sleeping dragon. There was no need to wake them. But cultural-elites just couldn't resist a trip back to high school, to beat down on the nerds one last time.

Who'd have thought. The gamepolitics.com link is Slashdotted.

It isn't; I had trouble with it even before I posted it (but I thought it was just me).

http://www.gamepolitics.com/20...

On September 16, 2012 GamePolitics published a story about Brad Wardell and Stardock Systems entitled " Report: Stardock Sued Former Marketing Manager After She Sued CEO for Sexual Harassment ." In that report we echoed a false narrative that Stardocks lawsuit against former marketing manager Alexandra Miseta was filed in retaliation for her filing a sexual harassment lawsuit against Stardock CEO Brad Wardell and his company in late 2010.

After reaching out to Wardell, I have come to the conclusion that I fell short in my reporting on this story and felt compelled to set the record straight. I have also seen proof from Wardell that legal actions were in motion long before Stardock filed its lawsuit against Miseta in the Summer of 2012. It should be noted at this point that Wardell could not have shown me this proof in September of 2012 because of ongoing litigation.

According to that new evidence (an invoice I have seen from the American Arbitration Association dated June 29, 2011 - Case #54-160-00009-11 02 CHFL-C) Stardock founder and CEO Brad Wardell, his attorney Paul P. Asker, former Stardock Marketing Manger Alexandra Miseta and/or her legal representative, were involved in ongoing arbitration. While we do not know the exact start or end date of those arbitration proceedings, two things become pretty clear: the lawsuit filed by Stardock (alleging that Miseta "deleted, destroyed, and/or stole promotional materials, analytics data, and trade show information" vital to the launch of Elemental: War of Magic) after the court denied the companys motion to dismiss Misetas sexual harassment case on July 13, 2012 was a change in venue of sorts - going from arbitration to a full blown court case.

Ultimately both lawsuits were settled out of court, culminating in a letter of apology written by Miseta.

The other thing I want to emphasize here is that, because Wardell was in litigation with Miseta on two different fronts, there was no way he would have made a public comment to the media... but he was never given a fair chance to do so by us or the many other news outlets reporting on the story.

Whether someone is willing to comment on litigation while it is active is irrelevant; it is our job to give those that are the subject of tough stories like this one a reasonable amount of time to respond.

As President Harry S. Truman was fond of saying, "the buck stops here." I take full responsibility for the articles that continued this narrative (whether I wrote them or not) because as the managing editor I encouraged our writers to write them and approved them for publication. And while I did reach out to Wardell prior to publishing our story, he deserved more than a few hours to respond to those accusations.

At the end of the day I let our readers down and did a disservice to all involved. For that I offer my sincerest apologies. On a personal note, I want to publicly thank Brad Wardell for taking the time to show me proof and to accept my apology. I only wish I had been able to see that proof sooner.

As an aside, I was compelled to revisit this topic after the

Who'd have thought. The gamepolitics.com link is Slashdotted.

It isn't; I had trouble with it even before I posted it (but I thought it was just me).

http://www.gamepolitics.com/20...

On September 16, 2012 GamePolitics published a story about Brad Wardell and Stardock Systems entitled " Report: Stardock Sued Former Marketing Manager After She Sued CEO for Sexual Harassment ." In that report we echoed a false narrative that Stardocks lawsuit against former marketing manager Alexandra Miseta was filed in retaliation for her filing a sexual harassment lawsuit against Stardock CEO Brad Wardell and his company in late 2010.

After reaching out to Wardell, I have come to the conclusion that I fell short in my reporting on this story and felt compelled to set the record straight. I have also seen proof from Wardell that legal actions were in motion long before Stardock filed its lawsuit against Miseta in the Summer of 2012. It should be noted at this point that Wardell could not have shown me this proof in September of 2012 because of ongoing litigation.

According to that new evidence (an invoice I have seen from the American Arbitration Association dated June 29, 2011 - Case #54-160-00009-11 02 CHFL-C) Stardock founder and CEO Brad Wardell, his attorney Paul P. Asker, former Stardock Marketing Manger Alexandra Miseta and/or her legal representative, were involved in ongoing arbitration. While we do not know the exact start or end date of those arbitration proceedings, two things become pretty clear: the lawsuit filed by Stardock (alleging that Miseta "deleted, destroyed, and/or stole promotional materials, analytics data, and trade show information" vital to the launch of Elemental: War of Magic) after the court denied the companys motion to dismiss Misetas sexual harassment case on July 13, 2012 was a change in venue of sorts - going from arbitration to a full blown court case.

Ultimately both lawsuits were settled out of court, culminating in a letter of apology written by Miseta.

The other thing I want to emphasize here is that, because Wardell was in litigation with Miseta on two different fronts, there was no way he would have made a public comment to the media... but he was never given a fair chance to do so by us or the many other news outlets reporting on the story.

Whether someone is willing to comment on litigation while it is active is irrelevant; it is our job to give those that are the subject of tough stories like this one a reasonable amount of time to respond.

As President Harry S. Truman was fond of saying, "the buck stops here." I take full responsibility for the articles that continued this narrative (whether I wrote them or not) because as the managing editor I encouraged our writers to write them and approved them for publication. And while I did reach out to Wardell prior to publishing our story, he deserved more than a few hours to respond to those accusations.

At the end of the day I let our readers down and did a disservice to all involved. For that I offer my sincerest apologies. On a personal note, I want to publicly thank Brad Wardell for taking the time to show me proof and to accept my apology. I only wish I had been able to see that proof sooner.

As an aside, I was compelled to revisit this topic after the

Who'd have thought. The gamepolitics.com link is Slashdotted.

It isn't; I had trouble with it even before I posted it (but I thought it was just me).

http://www.gamepolitics.com/20...

On September 16, 2012 GamePolitics published a story about Brad Wardell and Stardock Systems entitled " Report: Stardock Sued Former Marketing Manager After She Sued CEO for Sexual Harassment ." In that report we echoed a false narrative that Stardocks lawsuit against former marketing manager Alexandra Miseta was filed in retaliation for her filing a sexual harassment lawsuit against Stardock CEO Brad Wardell and his company in late 2010.

After reaching out to Wardell, I have come to the conclusion that I fell short in my reporting on this story and felt compelled to set the record straight. I have also seen proof from Wardell that legal actions were in motion long before Stardock filed its lawsuit against Miseta in the Summer of 2012. It should be noted at this point that Wardell could not have shown me this proof in September of 2012 because of ongoing litigation.

According to that new evidence (an invoice I have seen from the American Arbitration Association dated June 29, 2011 - Case #54-160-00009-11 02 CHFL-C) Stardock founder and CEO Brad Wardell, his attorney Paul P. Asker, former Stardock Marketing Manger Alexandra Miseta and/or her legal representative, were involved in ongoing arbitration. While we do not know the exact start or end date of those arbitration proceedings, two things become pretty clear: the lawsuit filed by Stardock (alleging that Miseta "deleted, destroyed, and/or stole promotional materials, analytics data, and trade show information" vital to the launch of Elemental: War of Magic) after the court denied the companys motion to dismiss Misetas sexual harassment case on July 13, 2012 was a change in venue of sorts - going from arbitration to a full blown court case.

Ultimately both lawsuits were settled out of court, culminating in a letter of apology written by Miseta.

The other thing I want to emphasize here is that, because Wardell was in litigation with Miseta on two different fronts, there was no way he would have made a public comment to the media... but he was never given a fair chance to do so by us or the many other news outlets reporting on the story.

Whether someone is willing to comment on litigation while it is active is irrelevant; it is our job to give those that are the subject of tough stories like this one a reasonable amount of time to respond.

As President Harry S. Truman was fond of saying, "the buck stops here." I take full responsibility for the articles that continued this narrative (whether I wrote them or not) because as the managing editor I encouraged our writers to write them and approved them for publication. And while I did reach out to Wardell prior to publishing our story, he deserved more than a few hours to respond to those accusations.

At the end of the day I let our readers down and did a disservice to all involved. For that I offer my sincerest apologies. On a personal note, I want to publicly thank Brad Wardell for taking the time to show me proof and to accept my apology. I only wish I had been able to see that proof sooner.

As an aside, I was compelled to revisit this topic after the

It got Brad Wardell (CEO of Stardock) some long-overdue apologies for hit pieces run against him.

http://www.gamepolitics.com/20...

Who'd have thought. The gamepolitics.com link is Slashdotted.

I clicked on it because I'm a suspicious bastard. I want to read it and see if it's a real apology. Hopefully somebody who makes it through the press of bodies will quote from it.

Nah, Sarkeesian was a hack before the whole gamer gate thing even started.

Gamergate itself has clearly done more good than Sarkeesian ever hoped to.

It exposed nepotism and collusion in games journalism.

It got Brad Wardell (CEO of Stardock) some long-overdue apologies for hit pieces run against him.

https://twitter.com/iamDavidWi...

http://www.gamepolitics.com/20...

http://www.zenofdesign.com/in-...

Oh, you didn't hear about that? Well, I guess the same corrupt media (and the mainstream media, in turn) didn't report it, so, like whoever's in charge of Slashdot, we should pretend it never happened. You know, the same way we pretend that Snowden did no good because the corrupt NSA (and the Executive and Congress in turn) never acknowledged it.

And it's forcing Gawker to revise its policies to comply with updated FTC guidelines, which the FTC acknowledges came about because of Gamergate's OperationUV.

Damn, look at all these journalists, forced to be ethical against their will. If the media ever covers it, they'll probably invent some new term for the headlines, like "Ethics Rape."

I got some good calls-to-action from Vint Cerf (Google's Internet Evangelist) on SOPA and PIPA, and a free and open Internet in general, but haven't heard anything from him on CISPA since last year. I wonder if he's still on payroll.

... The game eventually came out of Beta, and since I didn't get updates with my lack of license I eventually tried to give them my money again, because at this point I was having a blast with the game and wanted the new features. They took my money, I got the released version.

But... that was DRM, and you just proved my point. Because you didn't have a valid license key, you couldn't receive software updates, join public servers, and you were getting nagged that you hadn't bought the software. That is an example of well-implemented DRM.

This is similar to the DRM that I was advocating in my post. In fact, the article I linked above, talks about Captain Hector, who's described in this link:
http://www.ambrosiasw.com/support/faqs/products/escape-velocity/Does-Captain-Hector-serve-any-real-purpose

Just like Minecraft, the DRM doesn't prevent you from playing the game if you don't pay. If the payment servers are down, you can still play for a while. However, over the next few weeks, it slowly nags you more and more aggressively until you pony up. Once you do activate the game, it's activated forever and doesn't require the internet to play. This is stronger DRM than Mojang had in Minecraft, but I consider it very acceptable. It's NOTHING like "If our activation servers aren't available right now, you can't play your game (SimCity)."

I buy games with the above (acceptable) DRM, which means that Steam, Stardock, Mojang, and Ambrosia software are all companies I would purchase from. I will not be purchasing SimCity.

Stardock's stance on DRM (and software return/quality policies):
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/08/29/stardock-releases-gamer039s-bill-rights-pax#.UQhQT2eS98E

Carpathia still has the warez on their servers. Which are still frozen by DoJ.

http://www.gamepolitics.com/2012/10/05/report-seized-megaupload-data-be-subject-future-us-court-hearing

If you need anything beyond the currently supported standards, Microsoft and Apple are surprisingly easy to work with.

Really? REALLY?!?

You've got to be kidding me, right?

Considering it took pretty much EVERYONE reading Apple the riot act over the scripting language thing... I'd say that this was an example that negates your take on Apple. They're NOT surprisingly easy to work with.

Considering that Microsoft had TIGHT restrictions until recently on Indie titles... I'd say this was an example that negates your take on Microsoft. They're NOT surprisingly easy to work with.

If you're outside their parameters or standards, they're going to flip you the bird like you accused Google of doing- unless you're big or you've got damned near everyone bitching at them. Much like Google's situation.

more than once. their business model is to steal other's creative work, make many millions then settled out of court for millions of dollars.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/238331/zynga_sued_for_alleged_patent_infringement.html
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/12/zynga-and-vostu-settle-lawsuit-over-social-games.html
http://gamepolitics.com/2011/02/23/zynga-settles-digital-chocolate-mafia-wars-lawsuit
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/20/zynga-is-hit-with-countersuit-over-game-designs/
among others...

I can only speak as a game developer, but I have yet to be pointed to a game on the App Store that didn't make any money but had all the pieces together to be a commercially successful game.

http://www.gamepolitics.com/2009/06/08/iphone-dev-appstore-games-not-selling

This is the norm, he's in the top 1000 and not making any money.

Enjoy.

Oh don't worry someone has linked the riots to GTA.

http://gamepolitics.com/2011/08/08/london-constable-blames-gta-weekend-riots-city

July: http://www.gamepolitics.com/2010/07/01/ice-seizes-website-domains-part-copyright-crackdown

Nov: http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/130763-homeland-security-dept-seizes-domain-names-

Dec: ?

And in the UK its the police:

Mid-November: http://libcom.org/news/police-force-shut-down-fitwatchorguk-16112010

Late-November: http://www.techeye.net/internet/uk-police-want-power-to-shut-down-websites

Unfortunately the US government (at least in the US) has pulled ahead in terms of controlling the internet via seizure: July: http://www.gamepolitics.com/2010/07/01/ice-seizes-website-domains-part-copyright-crackdown Nov: http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/130763-homeland-security-dept-seizes-domain-names- Dec: ? And in the UK its the police: Mid-November: http://libcom.org/news/police-force-shut-down-fitwatchorguk-16112010 Late-November: http://www.techeye.net/internet/uk-police-want-power-to-shut-down-websites

It uses steamworks. YMMV, as far as that being a good or a bad thing is concerned. (Good thing, in my opinion.)

What? You don't? So... you're expecting a commercial plane to allow you to pull out wifi or drape a bunch of CAT-5 everywhere to play games on the flight? What?!?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_LAN#Peer-to-peer

I somehow feel our military has more important things to do than play Starcraft II on deployment.

http://gamepolitics.com/2007/11/12/military-wives-form-non-profit-to-equip-troops-with-video-games

The thing is, adding LAN play obviously is a drop in the ocean compared to the $100 million; they have all the network code done, it would simply be a matter of writing some code that instead of send requests for games to Battle.net, sending them locally.
The real reason is obviously to reduce "piracy" by tying the game to their online service, and screwing their costumers in the process, as it has become usual nowadays.

While more aggressive incentives did manage to lure the Public Enemies production to Wisconsin, after doling out $4.6 million in tax credits to the production, it was estimated that the filming of the movie only brought in $5 million in local economic activity

Seems the UK government was aiming for a wider ranging effect with it's budgeting as noted http://www.develop-online.net/news/35205/Tax-Breaks-the-deal-is-off -

As part of his Emergency Budget, Osborne said that subsidies for developers first proposed by the previous Labour government in April will not come into force. He described the suggestion as 'poorly targeted' as part of a wide-ranging budget that outlined a number of cuts and tweaks to the economy designed to reduce the deficit and facilitate business growth. And despite saying "I want a sign to go up above the British economy that says 'open for business'," he made it clear that this will not be made by selectively offering tax cuts to specific fields such as games.

Everyone makes mistakes ... how many states are there again ?

Unless of course he was telling a future truth ... and this is perhaps how he wanted to accomplish that.

And frankly, in case anyone missed it ... Obama is a lawyer. A lawyer who went into politics. With all that goes with it. You'd think slashdot would support the candidate that cares about issues they'd consider important (not that I have too many illusions about McCain being different, but hey if there's a choice between someone in big content's bed versus someone merely flirting with them, I know what to choose. At least the next set of shitty laws would take longer in coming. Besides democrats voted in the dmca, if anyone's going to vote it back out it'll be the other party).

Gamepolitics has covered this extensively http://www.gamepolitics.com/category/topics/california?page=1 At the end of that article they link to a pdf of the judge's ruling.

Similar laws have been passed and ruled unconstitutional in numerous places including Indianapolis, St. Louis, Illinois, Oklahoma, and Louisiana. The NYTimes also has an article that includes some explanation http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/21/arts/television/21vide.html

Is this for real? The link in the article returns a 404 error. Here's a somewhat more useful link. The actual bill going forward is considerably less restrictive.

Switzerland is rather liberal about sex. Prostitution is legal, and hookers charge VAT and take credit cards. Teen porn is available in mainstream video rental stores. While Switzerland isn't very violent, Swiss citizens and most permanent residents can own guns, and almost everyone in the military reserves (a big fraction of the population, since Switzerland has a draft) has a military-issued assault rifle at home.

On the other hand, actually doing anything violent is considered un-Swiss. Violent crime is rare in Switzerland. It tends to attract too much attention. With a big army for its size, a well-organized police force, a large number of people who not only own guns but regularly qualify on the range, and a tendency to bullet-proof banks and even railway ticket offices, violent crime tends not to be successful.

Follow this link. No game playing aficionado should miss it, especially if they subscribe to O'Reilly's banter. And if you hate O'Reilly, this will be perfect ammo for the next time you encounter a follower of his punditing. Bill O'Reilly Slams PS3 Launch, Gamers, iPods, Digital Tech (not in that order). He is an idiot, and nor relevant at all.

Remind me: how many millions of people play The Sims?

Games are good for your eyesight, social life, physical health, learning, stress, language skills and economy, among other things.

Oh, and gaming addiction is mostly bunk.

On the issue of kids faking their birth date after being initially rejected, Game Politics said:

"... half of these worlds did not accept kids who re-registered on the same computer using a modified birth date."

I responded:

I presume this means these systems would also reject adults who try to re-register (either after entering the wrong date by accident, or because they have kids who've unsuccessfully tried to register on the same computer)? I hope such a system doesn't ever become law; it seems like such a terrible idea, especially considering how silly the "problem" really is.

The FTC should have better things to worry about than explict content and kids not being segregated from adults.

The war between open and closed source has coalesced in the gaming community. Take Infinity Ward vs Steam for example. Both have great games; however one allows for open source utilization and private dedicated hosting, while the other has recently chosen to horde their source code and even the rights to multiplayer dedicated hosting. You would not think that these two giants would be conspiring, especially with both of their track records in the gaming community, but I have drawn some dangerous conclusions for the entire gaming community in my mind about such things: We must examine the recent developments to come to this insane conclusion of mine: Both corporate giants Infinity Ward and Steam have sold out to each other: http://www.gamepolitics.com/2009/11/06/non-steam-digital-deliverers-uninterested-selling-mw2 You can’t play Call of Duty:Modern Warfare 2 without steam on the PC version, and at the same time Infinity Ward has decided to not allow the PC version to have private dedicated servers! This is a dangerous leap towards PC gaming prioritization, all in the name of “keeping the PC on a level playing field with consoles”. How many more people will buy into the amazing DRM abilities of Steam and then lock every open source aspect of their game? Will Valve follow suit? I fear that there is an inevitable slow prioritization happening in the PC gaming world. For once the PC world becomes as DRM restricted as efficiently as the console world, both console and PC gamers will be screwed in quality, hosting, and pricing. I do not believe that anything good can come from this new trend seen emerge with the Steam/Infinity Ward convergence with the CoD:MW2 release. Unless PC gamers are able to restrict themselves from supporting these colossal game giants to protest their move to not allow things like their disabled dedicated server capabilities, we will be allowing these companies to succumb to the inevitable greed that will prosper in this world of PC gaming prioritization. The scary part is Infinity Ward is apart of Activision, and Activision is apart of Blizzard. You can see how the conspiracies can fly off the handle from here.

Interesting

One of the guys from GamePolitics asked him if he used the actual 'report group' funciton and see if that worked, Jack responded calling him and idiot/moron as he usually does with that site (he used to troll the comments sections quite frequently in the past.

Looks like they did it themselves and one of the groups listed in Thompsons lawsuit and it was gone within 24 hours

He could have easily did this himself but no, because he didnt go though the proper channels nothing happened. He may think he is a celebrity so a letter to the CEO is the way for him to do it. He may think hes so important that the CEO would drop everything and see into the matter personally.

This reeks like a desperate grab for attention. http://gamepolitics.com/2009/10/01/one-mouse-click-later-thompson-fb-group-removed

link to a reproduction of the JT press release

Much like the Kama Sutra rejection, this brings home how farcical Apple trying to be gatekeeper and arbiter of taste on the app store really is. They should give up now before their reputation sinks under the weight of their hypocrisy - every week I hear of a new stupid and arbitrary decision by their app store reviewers.

Looking at the parents group response games like beer pong or "Madworld" got on the wii, I have a little sympathy. Neither game was marketed at kids. Parents groups seemed more upset with Nintendo than the publishers, citing reasons that boiled down to "OMFG, KIDS PLAY THE WII, HOW COULD YOU NOT CENSOR THIS NINTENDO?!?"

Granted, doing stupid things to avoid upsetting stupid people is stupid, but they are a company, not an organization dedicated to freedom of expression. They'd be reasonable to think that if they don't maintain some standards, parents groups would fly off the handle, boycott it, and they'd be losing out on their most profitable market: kids. It's somewhat positive that at least now they would have published it rather than just quashing it forever.

Naturally, the real solution should be parents acting like parents, but naturally pigs will fly before these groups put responsibility on their members.

Just to save you the time, the headline of TFA ends with the words "Legal in 39 States". And that article links to this which says you can't play video games for cash in Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Montana, Tennessee and Vermont.

Tonight's Penn and Teller Episode is supposed to tackle video game violence tonight if you're interested. Apparently Jack Thompson is supposed to make an appearance. I cannot wait for them to talk to that crackpot.

... more flying penis attacks. Won't someone think of the children?

There is one thing this boy wonder does not like.

"I feel it's a waste of time playing video games, I feel its a waste of time and it's not helping humanity in any way."

And GamePolitics' Andrew Eisen notes:

Perhaps a rather odd statement coming from a lad whose passions include martial arts, scuba diving and playing piano. He also aspires to be a movie actor.

I found that amusing that he finds some form of entertainment to (music & movies) to benefit humanity more so than games. I wonder if he's ever played Settlers of Catan?

This badly: http://www.gamepolitics.com/category/jack-thompson.
In particular, see http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/09/25/disbarred

This badly: http://www.gamepolitics.com/category/jack-thompson.
In particular, see http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/09/25/disbarred

Wanna bet the "protesters" were doing more than just standing there with placards ?

Wanna bet that you didn't RTFA? The protesters were described as peaceful as can be, with the average age being over 40. Their list of offenses? They made some speeches and marched to the entrance of the AEC. Essentially, they were considered trespassing.

You don't get, as a protestor, to deny anyone access anywhere.

Which they didn't do.

You don't get to damage cars, or any other type of private property and, of course, a protest takes responsability for all protestors.

Which they didn't do.

If the police thinks the group is damaging property or denying people access to a location, they do not only have the right to end the protest, they have the duty to do so.

Again, they didn't do any of those. The police arrested them for trespassing, and I don't blame them for that. The police were only doing their job. But I don't see the point in your post, when you're basing it off of assumptions and won't even bother to read any of the links posted in the summary.

Besides, peace protesting in the united states is a farce. Someone who hides in a territory that's defended by the biggest guns on the planet is not a peace protestor. A real "peace protestor" would demonstrate in a lawless region without police forces present. You know, like Southern Darfur. You don't see many peace protests there, of course, for good reason. It doesn't make peace protests in America any less hypocrite.

How the fuck did this get modded insightful? Why would peace protesting be hypocritical in the U.S. ? One of the definitions of hypocrisy is:

The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.

How are peace protesters, in this case, practicing beliefs that they do not hold? It would be hypocritical of them if they were protesting war, and at the same time, donating money to weapons manufacturers. One of the freedoms afforded to us is the freedom of assembly. It would be a damn shame for us to HAVE such freedom and not exercise it.

Why not just change the name and the story and release it?

Maybe because they were counting on the realism? And, dare I say it, the controversial attention was its biggest guarantee to sell?

I haven't read any of the articles linked above but I submitted it this morning and found a quote from a developer making it sound like information had been gathered for the game from all parties involved in the conflict.

Also, Dan Rosenthal, a blogger and veteran of the Iraq War, gave this insightful analysis of Konami's situation:

In order to make the game fun... it simply has to sacrifice some amount of realism for fun factor. When you do that with a war game based on a real war, with real people, you run the risk of dishonoring their memories and sacrifices, and I think that this game has a dangerous potential to do that.

It is understood that morals play a role in the creation of laws. Every society has values that are generally accepted by the population. These values are encapsulated in the laws which are created. However, once a law is in effect, individual morality has no place in its interpretation. Even when a person feels a law is wrong it has to be shown that it is wrong on a societal scale not just in the eyes of the individual in order for change to be effected.

For this reason, we have groups of people who have been entrusted to enforce the laws as they are written, to interpret the laws as they are written, and to determine if those laws are, in fact, written correctly. The most recent example I can think of is the gaming bill vetoed by the Utah governor.

We can't just go deciding for ourselves that a law is wrong. We can make a case to change it and hope to convince enough people that society needs the change but, as citizens, we have to abide by it even while working to change it. Continuing with my example, while Jack Thompson is working to change laws, it is being shown over and over again that just because he thinks they are morally wrong, they aren't legally wrong (or at least, he hasn't convinced enough people that they are morally wrong).

I don't think he ever has, if that gives you any idea how utterly rare they are.

The most famous sanction against Thompson, barring him from filing documents to the Florida Supreme Court, was done in state court under state procedures. The mildly hilarious ruling can be found here.

Maybe ol' JT should disclose that he's not a lawyer.
Now that's truth in Advertising.

Seriously, I know idle is supposed to be random easy going article but at least get your facts straight. People need to start doing some research before talking out of their asses.
Lets take a look at these:

This one

and this one

First of all, he wasn't blaming games. If anything he just wanted to get to school. It was more of an explanation on how he pulled it off.

Second. The parents were arrested. Apparently the kid wasn't allowed to be left alone with his dad's new bimbo. And by not allowed I mean a court order had been issued.
The kid missed the bus and since his "mom" was still sleeping (hungover or drunk) he decided to grab the car keys and make a mad dash for school so he could "get breakfast and go to PT". I wouldn't call that stealing. I call that dedicated.

Hm, apparently the AP story has disappeared (and apparently it didn't mention the actual violence, it just said he was "coerced"), but I know I read it somewhere... Google does turn up this page to support me, anyway.

Psychology studies of the effects of playing video games have found emotional responses and physical reactions associated with reinforced violent and anti-social attitudes. It is not clear, however, whether these markers are associated with increases in one's preferences for anti-social behaviors or whether virtual behaviors act to partially sate one's desire for actual antisocial behaviors. Violent or criminal behaviors in the virtual world and in the physical world could plausibly be either complements or substitutes. A finding of one versus the other would have diametrically opposing policy implications. I study the incidence of criminal activity as related to a proxy for increased gaming, the number of game stores, from a panel of US counties from 1994 to 2004. With fixed county and year effects, I can examine if changes relative increases in gaming in an area are associated with relative increases or decreases in criminal activity. For six of eight categories of crime, more game stores are associated with significant declines in crime rates. Proxies for other leisure activities, sports and movie viewing, do not have a similar effect. For confirmation, I also find that mortality rates, especially mortality rates stemming from injuries, also are negatively related to the number of game stores.

Video Games, Crime and Violence by Michael R. Ward, University of Texas at Arlington - Department of Economics

There is no epidemic of youth violence in America.

The whole concept is a lie manufactured, distributed and perpetuated by the media. Kids are not killing each other more frequently than they used to. In fact, it turns out the opposite is true.

CAUTION: Childen at Play - The Truth About Violent Youth and Video Games

Overall results of the study found that although violent video games appear to increase people's aggressive thoughts (which it would not be surprising that people are still thinking about what they were just playing), violent games do not appear to increase aggressive behavior.

This as true for both correlational and experimental studies. Also it was found that studies that employed less standardized measures of aggression produced higher effects than better standardized measures of aggression. In other words, better measures of aggression are associated with lower effects.

Researcher Finds Scant Evidence Linking Violent Games With Aggressive Behavior

"It's a natural behavior and it's surprising that the idea that children and adolescents learn aggression from the media is still relevant," says Richard Tremblay, a professor of pediatrics, psychiatry and psychology at the University of Montreal, who has spent more than two decades tracking 35,000 Canadian children (from age five months through their 20s) in search of the roots of physical aggression. "Clearly youth were violent before television appeared."

Taming Baby Rage: Why Are Some Kids So Angry?

The BBFC has accepted there is no proven link between anti-social behaviour and violent videogames - but said more research is required to conclusively rule any connection out.

No evidence connecting games and violence, says BBFC News

What a nice day today...RIAA loses, DOJ opposes DOJ Copyright Oversight. What's next? Bush finally gets impeached?

Almost. Jack Thompson was disbarred today.

In a four-page written order (download here.), the Florida Supreme Court today affirmed a referee's recommendation to permanently disbar controversial Miami attorney Jack Thompson...
The Court also upheld a fine of $43,675 against Thompson.

I think the end-times are upon us. Time to move to Alaska for the rapture...

This isn't like being fired because you beat your boss at golf, this is like being fired because you lost your temper, took out an ad in the local newspaper saying your company kills puppies, and then took a shit on your boss' desk.

...and then when your boss told you not to do that, so you told everyone at the company that she had it in for you because she was secretly a lesbian. And then you started posting photographs of members of the boss' family in the break room, and included several pages of hard core gay porn in the company's annual report.

Only to receive a stern talking to by the folks over at HR, and strong advice to seek the psychiatric help you so clearly need.

This is like doing all that and then still keeping your job, only to continue showing up to work with no pants on and pissing on the water cooler every single day for the next year, and _then_ finally being fired.

No sane person could possibly be surprised that this happened, only that it took this long.